The "scissor" function sounds like another term for the protease in HIV. HIV produces a long string of polypeptide and then cleaves it into sections, each of which are a protein used in the viral capsid.

So um... are we saying this is just another protease inhibitor, like most of the other HIV drugs?

HSV-1, while usually "above the waist", can be found in the genitals, and "below the waist" HSV-2 can be found on the lips. Herpes labialis and genitalis are very often the exact same virus. See here for example.

So when you got teased for having "mouth herpes" as a kid -- well, they were on to something :D

I know. But genital herpes can be caused by either of them. The common knowledge used to be that HSV-2 only caused genital herpes, but a number of studies in the past 20 years have shown increasing amounts of it being caused by HSV-1. Not sure about cold sores; I think (though I haven't checked) that the majority of those infections are HSV-1.

It's actually very interesting, because the incidence of new HSV-1 genital herpes cases is in the youngest age cohorts; for older populations (even including new cases), HSV-2 still predominates. So is it new sexual practices? Or because better awareness of cold sore transmission has lead to a later sero-status conversion, and more susceptibility of HSV genital infections?

I'm with the more young people have oral sex camp myself :) Anyway, just thought it was an interesting tidbit, about how diseases and common knowledge change.

It seems to be a legit site. While it is a relatively young site, the "about us" section seems straightforward and the other articles are very interesting and more in depth than most articles I come across on a daily basis. Just a humble observation of course. I wish I knew how to hyperlink in the forums (please forgive my tech ignorance), but here is the url: http://www.physorg.com/help/about-us/

Just to be clear--this is still just a treatment, right? Like HIV treatments, this sounds like it just arrests the virus's reproductive cycle, not kill it directly and facilitate its total removal from the body.

"Herpesviruses include pathogens such as herpes simplex 1 and 2, the virus that causes chickenpox otherwise known as zoster virus, the Epstein-Barr virus -associated with several types of cancer -, the roseola virus, the cytomegalovirus and the herpes virus associated with Kaposi sarcoma -in AIDS patients -."

It means that with further study the protein might be able to be modified into a different one which is effective against all herpes viruses. If one bothered to RTFA, one would discover that at present UL89 is only effective against a single herpes virus.

So, I realize that most of these published findings rarely go anywhere, and a cure to all of those diseases seems a little too good and far-fetched. But does anyone know the chances of this being effective and coming to market?

It would end my fears of getting cold sores from my girlfriend, who gets pissed off that I won't go near her face when she has one and has to resort to sneaking kisses in. I haven't gotten a cold sore yet, but the thought terrifies me, and this article gives me hope.

She also habitually picks at them, and now has a scar. Actually, pretty much anything on her face she'll habitually itch. She dislikes wearing make-up because she rubs it off and doesn't realize until later. Now she's rolling with the "You probably already have it so why don't you just kiss me" excuse.

If you have been infected you'll get a cold sore between 2 and 20 days later, so if it's been longer than that you are most likely in the clear. I honestly think you'd be better off not being with someone who thinks nothing of infecting you with an incurable disease.

I don't think it's like that. She's had it most of her life, so I don't think she understands how nice it is to have one less thing to worry about. To her, it's a momentary annoyance a couple of times a year that she scratches and picks at. The fact that she doesn't care is just an underlying behavior. Take for example how she got it: Her mom wouldn't let her kiss her by the cold sore, so she'd run up at night, while her mom was sleeping, and steal a kiss right on it. She doesn't see anything wrong with it, and doesn't really mind.

Apparently, I'm in the clear, so I'll be giving her a very stern "no" the next time, and hopefully convince her that it's perfectly reasonable to not kiss her for a couple weeks out of the year to avoid the problem.

Finally an end to my damn cold sores!!! I sure hope this pans out. I usually get a cold sore once a year. That's about 1.5 - 2 weeks of the year that I am depressed because I can't kiss my wife. This would save me so much pain and frustration. Thanks for the news reddit!

And this is just patenting the study. In any case, it would still have to go through the same regulatory processes and what not before these indications would be approved.

If it's not patented, it's more dangerous. More competition means the drug isn't as attractive for production and then noone or very few produce it, or it ends up as a complete monopoly. A patent will at least force the company to be more competitive while the patent lasts and then make prices more competitive once generics come out.

A patent is a guarantee of a monopoly for 20 years from the patent file date. Since the drugs typically spend another 6 years trying to gain FDA approval, that leaves about 14 years of monopoly time on the drug. Each drug can cost hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in research and development, and most of those drugs don't gain approval, or can't beat a placebo, etc.

The entire point of a patent on the drug is to give the company that spent the hundreds of millions of dollars developing the drug a chance to recoup that cost plus the cost of all the drugs they developed that didn't do anything, plus profit for their shareholders. Now, since the US government already subsidizes this research, I think at the very least we should be studying what a system with completely socialized research would look like, and what benefits it would confer. My instinct is to say it would make drugs that do reach market safer, cheaper, and more widely available, but at what cost?

Socializing the program is politically impossible. It would be the subject of politicization for decades, with constant budget crises wrought upon it by an ineffective Congress with a bad habit of politicizing science, and the danger is that our research would then grind to a halt under this pressure, which would arguably be the worst option.

I'll reply to this fully a bit later on.. I'll come back and edit. Meanwhile, you should take bioequivalency into account. Generics without bioequivalency can still be sold, so it is never truly a monopoly.

If it's not bioequivalent, it's not the same drug, and it has to run through its own approval process, and costs a similar amount to produce, and is eligible for its own patent. At least, that is my understanding, but I'm an electrical engineer, not a BME.

It's like the difference between C20H25N3O and C16H17N3O (LSD and LSA). Similar formulas, similar effects, but still very distinct.

Does anyone actually give a shit about this? Seriously guys, it's not that bad. Just make up an excuse not to bang her for a few days til the sores go away. If you make it past your sophomore year of college without getting a case of the happies you're a pussy.